Peer Review Process
Overview
HAYULA: INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY ISLAMIC STUDIES
All manuscripts submitted to Hayula undergo a rigorous, transparent, and ethical double-blind peer review process to ensure academic quality, originality, and scholarly integrity. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation process.
Manuscripts are evaluated based on scholarly merit, methodological rigor, theoretical contribution, and relevance to multidisciplinary Islamic studies in both local and global contexts.
Initial Evaluation1–2 weeks after submission
Upon submission via OJS, the Editorial Team conducts a preliminary screening to verify that:
- ▸ The manuscript aligns with the journal’s aim and scope.
- ▸ The submission complies with publication and formatting requirements.
- ▸ The similarity index does not exceed 20%.
- ▸ Ethical standards and anonymization requirements for double-blind review are fulfilled.
Possible outcomes at this stage:
- ▸ Desk rejection if the manuscript falls outside the journal’s scope or exceeds the similarity threshold.
- ▸ Return for technical revision if formatting or submission requirements are not satisfied.
- ▸ Proceed to Reviewer Assignment if all initial criteria are met.
Assignment to Handling Editor and Reviewers1–2 weeks
- ▸ A handling editor is appointed to manage the review process.
- ▸ A minimum of two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise are selected.
- ▸ Reviewers must be affiliated with institutions different from those of the corresponding author.
- ▸ The journal applies a double-blind system; author and reviewer identities remain confidential.
- ▸ Author-identifying information must be removed from the manuscript and submitted separately in the Title Page file.
- ▸ Reviewers evaluate the invitation based on:
- – Subject expertise
- – Absence of conflicts of interest
- – Availability
Reviewer assignments are generally completed within 1 to 2 weeks.
Review ProcessApproximately 3–4 weeks
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:
- ▸ Originality and scholarly contribution
- ▸ Theoretical and analytical depth
- ▸ Methodological rigor
- ▸ Clarity and organization
- ▸ Relevance to multidisciplinary Islamic studies
Reviewers provide detailed and constructive comments and submit one of the following recommendations:
- ▸ Accept
- ▸ Minor Revision
- ▸ Major Revision
- ▸ Reject
Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final decision rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief.
Reviewers must not use generative AI tools to read, summarize, evaluate, or write reviews of manuscripts, and must not upload any part of a manuscript to an AI tool. Each reviewer confirms this in the OJS review form. A review found to be generated with AI is disregarded, and the reviewer may be removed from the reviewer list.
First Editorial DecisionTypically within 5–7 weeks from submission
Based on reviewer reports and editorial assessment, the handling editor prepares a recommendation. The Editor-in-Chief issues the official first decision.
Possible outcomes:
- ▸ Reject
- ▸ Minor Revision
- ▸ Major Revision
If the reviewers’ opinions diverge significantly, an additional reviewer may be invited.
Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments and clear revision instructions where applicable.
All editorial decisions are made by human editors. AI tools are not used to evaluate manuscripts or to make or draft decisions.
Revision Process
When revisions are requested:
Minor Revision
- ▸ Authors are typically granted 2–3 weeks for revision.
- ▸ The revised manuscript is usually evaluated by the handling editor without further external review.
Major Revision
- ▸ Authors are generally given 3–5 weeks for revision.
- ▸ The revised manuscript is normally returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation (approximately 2–3 additional weeks).
Multiple rounds of major revision may occur where necessary.
Authors must submit:
- ▸ A revised manuscript with clearly indicated changes
- ▸ A detailed point-by-point response to reviewer comments
Final DecisionTotal process: 10–16 weeks
After completion of revision and, where applicable, re-review stages, the Editor-in-Chief issues the final decision:
- ▸ Accept
- ▸ Accept with minor editorial adjustments.
- ▸ Reject
The overall review and decision process typically ranges from 10 to 16 weeks, depending on the extent and the reviewer’s availability.
All editorial decisions are made by human editors. AI tools are not used to evaluate manuscripts or to make or draft decisions.
Production and Publication2–3 weeks after final acceptance
Upon acceptance:
- ▸ The manuscript undergoes copyediting.
- ▸ Layout preparation and formatting are completed.
- ▸ Authors review proofs prior to publication.
- ▸ The article is assigned a DOI and published online.
The production stage generally requires an additional 2–3 weeks after final acceptance.
Article History
Each published article displays the key dates of its editorial process:
- ▸ Received: the date the manuscript was submitted through the journal’s OJS system.
- ▸ Revised: the date the revised manuscript was received from the author(s).
- ▸ Accepted: the date the Editor-in-Chief issued the final decision to accept the manuscript.
To align with common scholarly publishing practice, this definition applies to articles published from Vol. X No. Y onward. In earlier issues, the Received date referred to the date the manuscript was sent to reviewers after passing the Initial Evaluation (Section 1). All dates are recorded in the journal’s OJS system and can be verified upon request.
Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct
All parties involved in the review process treat manuscripts as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not share, discuss, or use unpublished material for any purpose other than the review, and must not upload it to public AI tools. Editors may use secure tools approved by the journal only for technical checks, such as similarity screening, and record such use in OJS. Conflicts of interest must be declared, and the person concerned withdraws from handling the manuscript. The use of AI by authors, editors, and reviewers is governed by the journal’s AI Policy.
Commitment to Quality
Hayula is committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, ethical publishing practices, and editorial independence. All manuscripts are evaluated objectively and free from conflicts of interest to ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly research.






Licensed under